As part of her trip to the Kyrgyz Republic, Aktoty Raimkulova, President of the Turkish Culture and Heritage Foundation, has visited Kyrgyz-Turkish Manas University, AzerNEWS reports. She also presented the books published by the Foundation to the university library.
Day: March 3, 2026
Georgia’s position on Iran
Analyst Gia Khukhashvili has commented on the Georgian government’s statement regarding the current events in Iran. He said he saw support for Iran in the government’s position.
On the morning of 28 February 2026, the United States and Israel launched missile strikes on Iran. US President Donald Trump demanded that Iran scale back its nuclear programme, which triggered the escalation. He also declared war on Iran because he believes recent large-scale protests in the country have created an opportunity to change its leadership. The Georgian government expressed condolences to Iran over the killing of Supreme Leader Ali Khamenei.
Gia Khukhashvili: “First, this is a very vague statement — a classic attempt to please both sides.
Second, the key line reads: ‘We express our condolences to the Iranian people and to the Republic of Iran.’ If the statement had not included the words ‘Republic of Iran’, it would have been little more than a formality. But offering condolences to the regime amounts to direct support for it.”
“Not to mention that a week earlier they lit up the TV tower in Tbilisi in the colours of the Iranian regime. I stress — not the Iranian state, because the national flag looks different. That clearly showed the position of the Georgian authorities, and the Americans will remember it.
The Georgian authorities say they want to improve relations with the United States, yet in this situation they issue such ambiguous statements with the wrong emphasis. Of course, this will cost them dearly.”
Georgia’s position on Iran
Move to strip Kan Kvarchia of immunity
Abkhazian opposition MP Kan Kvarchia faces an attempt to strip him of parliamentary immunity. The republic’s prosecutor general has again submitted a motion to the Supreme Court, arguing that his actions show signs of a criminal offence.
The prosecutor’s office first filed such a request in early February. After the initial hearing, however, it withdrew the motion. Prosecutors said the court had breached procedural deadlines in considering the case. They also promised to supplement the materials “to strengthen the position of the Prosecutor General’s Office” and resubmit them to the Supreme Court.
The court expressed surprise at the move. Judges stressed that they had not missed any deadlines and said they did not understand the prosecution’s reasoning.
Kan Kvarchia is one of the figures in a criminal scandal involving Russian political consultants who allegedly worked illegally for pro-government candidates during municipal elections in Abkhazia in November 2025.
A few days before the elections, Kvarchia led a group of opposition activists, accompanied by a journalist, to an office where the political consultants were working. After a brief confrontation, the opposition activists handed the consultants over to Abkhazia’s State Security Service (SGB), along with what they described as evidence of illegal activity.
The SGB responded by sending the consultants back to Russia. Once there, they filed a complaint with Russia’s Investigative Committee, which opened a criminal case against three Abkhaz opposition figures on charges of armed robbery against Russian citizens.
Abkhaz law enforcement authorities then opened a parallel case. As a preventive measure, they placed four opposition activists under house arrest and barred two others from leaving the republic.
Taking action against the seventh figure in the case — MP Kan Kvarchia — has proved more complicated, as he enjoys parliamentary immunity.
Under the law, the court must approve the Prosecutor General’s request to strip Kvarchia of his immunity, after which parliament must vote either in favour or against the decision.
Kvarchia’s lawyer, Mvrina Tania, says the “political consultants case” raises many questions and contains numerous inconsistencies, but she cannot discuss them in detail at this stage.
“I will only say that the defence does not understand how actions carried out in the presence of media representatives with video cameras, and in front of many people who were in the office at the time, can be classified as ‘threats of murder and causing grievous bodily harm’ — especially when the alleged victims were handed over to Abkhaz law enforcement together with the property seized from them,” the lawyer said.
Terms, place names, opinions and ideas suggested by the author of the publication are her / his own and do not necessarily coincide with the opinions and ideas of JAMnews or its individual employees. JAMnews reserves the right to remove comments on posts that are deemed offensive, threatening, violent or otherwise ethically unacceptable.
Move to strip Kan Kvarchia of immunity